ReviewDer Pathologe2020
[Application of FISH in the diagnosis of lung cancer].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Advancements in the diagnosis and treatment of sub‑centimeter lung cancer in the era of precision medicine (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Current treatment and novel insights regarding ROS1-targeted therapy in malignant tumors.Cancer medicine · 2024Review
- Detection of MET amplification by droplet digital PCR in peripheral blood samples of non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Current treatments for non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid advancements in the area of lung cancer therapy were determined by the discovery of molecular markers and the possibility of their therapeutic exploitation. Today's lung cancer diagnosis places high demands on pathologists. In the majority of cases, small tissue samples must suffice for diagnosis and testing of all relevant biomarkers. The minimum panel required for advanced non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) with nonsquamous histology includes testing of EGFR, BRAF, ALK, ROS1, and PD-L1-expression. So far, only PD-L1-IHC (immunohistochemistry, IHC) is required for squamous cell carcinoma. If possible, newer biomarkers such as RET, MET, HER2, NTRK, and KRAS should be integrated in test panels. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a well-established molecular method for the detection of chromosomal aberrations, such as ALK-, ROS1-, and RET- translocations and amplifications, such as Her2/neu or MET. The relevance of MET-FISH for the detection of amplifications in the first-line setting is controversial, but of high importance in the recurrent setting. All equivocal or discrepant results should be validated using orthogonal methods. IHC is a suitable, thoroughly validated method for ALK and ROS1 aberration detection with the advantage of quick and cost-efficient test results and tissue conservation. All other translocations, or discrepancy between IHC and FISH, require a sequencing-based confirmation procedure. The low frequency of NTRK fusions, and high sensitivity of NTRK-IHC, suggest using IHC as a prescreening tool with subsequent sequencing-based analysis for IHC positive cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.